The URL can be used to link to this page

18-102857FILE CITY OF ti. Federal Way Centered on Opportunity August 3, 2018 CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityoffederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor Vitaliy and Tantyana Shablevskiy Emailed: m 35310 25`h Avenue SW Federal Way, WA 98023 Re: File #18-102857-00-PC, PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY Shablevskiy Residence - Reasonable Use, SW 354th Street, Parcel #302104-9007 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy: Thank you for participating in the preapplication conference with the City of Federal Way's Development Review Committee (DRC) held July 26, 2018. We hope that the information discussed at that meeting was helpful in understanding the general requirements for your project as submitted. This letter summarizes comments given to you at the meeting by the members of the DRC. The members who reviewed your project and provided comments include staff from the City's Planning and Building Divisions and Public Works Department, and representatives from Lakehaven Water and Sewer District, and South King Fire and Rescue. Some sections of the Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) and relevant information handouts are enclosed with this letter. Please be advised, this letter does not represent all applicable codes. In preparing your formal application, please refer to the complete FWRC and other relevant codes for all additional requirements that may apply to your project. The key contact for your project is Leila Willoughby -Oakes, 253-835-2644, leila.willoughby- oakes@cityoffederalway-com. For specific technical questions about your project, please contact the appropriate DRC representative as listed below. Otherwise, any general questions about the preapplication and permitting process can be referred to your key contact. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The applicant proposes to develop a single family residence on a vacant parcel encumbered by a Category II wetland with a 105-ft. buffer. The project will also include right-of-way improvement along SW 354th Street. MAJOR ISSUES Outlined below is a summary of the major issues of your project based on the plans and information submitted for preapplication review. These issues can change due to modifications and revisions in the plans. These major issues only represent comments that the DRC consider most significant to your project and do not include the majority of the comments provided. The major issues section is only provided as a means to highlight critical requirements or issues. Please be sure to read the entire department comments made in the next section of this letter. r Planning Division 1. The proposed site contains critical areas: a wetland. 2. Process III `Project Approval' review required for a Reasonable Use request. Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 2 of 11 3. Proof of mitigation sequencing/mitigation plan will be required for a wetland buffer encroachment. 4. The residence footprint shall be a maximum of 1,500-1,600 square feet. a. Please provide the total lot coverage and building footprint, pathways, driveway, yard, eave overhang, patio etc. in square footage. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to minimize impact to the function and values associated with the critical area pursuant to FWRC 19.145.090. 5. Mitigation sequencing and plans may be subject to a peer review at the applicant's expense before a Process III decision. 5. The final drainage facilities shall be approved under the Process III site plan in compliance with the 2016 KCSWM to avoid future revisions to the reasonable use decision. • Public Works Development Services Division • Once building permit can be issued, Enhanced Basic Water Quality Treatment and Conservation Flow Control is required. • The applicant shall depict final stormwater management facilities on the reasonable use plan. Changes to drainage during construction review would be Subject to revisions to the reasonable use decision. • Public Works Traffic Division ■ Transportation Concurrency Management (FWRC 19.90) — Transportation concurrency permit with application fee of $1,669.00 is required for the proposed project. ■ Traffic Impact Fees (FWRC 19.91) — Traffic impact fees will be assessed at building permit issuance. ■ Frontage Improvements (FWRC 19.135.040) — Construct street improvements and dedicate right-of-way along the property frontage on SNV 354t' St. ■ Access Management (FWRC 19.135.260) — The development shall meet access management standards. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS Outlined below are the comments made by the representatives of each department present at the preapplication conference. Each section should be read thoroughly. If you have questions, please contact the representative listed for that section. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — PLANNING DIVISION Leila Willoughby -Oakes, 253-835-2644, leila.willoughby-oakes@cityoffederalway.com 1. Zoning — The site is zoned Single -Family High -Density Residential (RS 7.2); the minimum lot size is 7,200 sq. ft. A single-family residence (detached dwelling unit) is a permitted use in this zone. Setbacks, Height, and Lot Coverage — Dimensional requirements are contained in Federal Way Revised Code (FWRC) 19.200.010 `Detached dwelling unit. 'Minimum yard requirements are 20 feet in the front, five feet on the sides, and five feet in the rear. Side yard setback for a corner lot for that portion of the lot not adjacent to the primary vehicular access is 10 ft., otherwise five feet. Maximum permitted height in this zone is 30 feet above average building elevation (AABE). Maximum lot coverage is 60%. Staff will verify compliance with these requirements with the single family building permit application that is submitted for each individual lot. 18-102857-00-PC Doc I.D. 77997 Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 3 of 11 3. Land Use Application — Depending on the scope of work and impacts to the critical areas the following review processes may be required. Requests for reasonable use of the subject property require Process III Land Use review. Process III is an administrative review conducted by city staff with a final decision issued by the Director of Community Development. The Process III decision criteria are contained in FWRC 19.65.100.2(a). See FWRC Chapter 19.145.090 for additional requirements and reasonable use decisional criteria. Meeting follow-up: Please ensure the application materials contain sufficient analysis by the applicant or preferably their wetland biologist on how the proposal complies with the above criteria. 4. State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) —The project is exempt to environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) as the proposed development does not exceed the flexible thresholds pursuant to Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-800(1)(a)(i). Public Notification — Process III applications require a 15-day comment period. Within 14 days of issuing the Letter of Complete Application, a Notice of Application will be published in the Federal Way Mirror, and posted at the subject property and official notice boards within the city. Mailed notice to all residential property owners within 300 feet of the subject property is also required. The applicant is responsible for submitting stamped mailing envelopes for property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. The city's GIS Division can provide this service for a nominal fee. Please see the enclosed handout for further information. 6. Critical Areas — As shown on the City's critical areas maps, the site contains wetlands and associated buffers. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.080, a critical areas report that adequately evaluates the proposal and probable impacts is required. The report must also demonstrate that all reasonable efforts have been examined with the intent to avoid and minimize impacts to the critical areas per FWRC 19.145.130 "Mitigation Sequencing." The applicant is responsible for covering the cost of the city's consultants who may review the reports per FWRC 19.145.080(3). Site Reconnaissance — As a meeting follow-up, site reconnaissance necessary for preparing the reasonable use permit and building permit applications requires Partial Exemption approval per FWRC 19.145.120(2). Any disturbance fe-criticatarea s1r the site reconnaissance and the area shall be restored to its previous condition immediately. A written request must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to commencing the exploratory work. There is no fee associated with the partial exemption request. Wetlands — Delineation and rating of the on -site wetland will be required to determine the exact impacts to the wetland and wetland buffer. See FWRC 19.145.410-420 for wetland delineation and rating standards. The current delineation and rating shall expire 5 years after approval of the submitted report by the city's biologist. Reasonable Use of the Subject Property — The provisions of FWRC Chapter 19.145 may be modified or waived on a case -by -case basis if their implementation would deprive an applicant of all reasonable use of the subject property. Pursuant to FWRC 19.145.090 an applicant may apply for a modification or waiver of provisions of this chapter using Process III land use review. Doc 1 D 77997 18-102857-00-PC Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 4 of I 1 The city may approve a Reasonable Use request based on the following criteria: a) The application of the provisions of this chapter eliminates all reasonable use of the subject property; b) No feasible and reasonable on -site alternatives to the proposal are possible, such as changes to site layout and/or reduction of impervious improvements; c) It is solely the implementation of this chapter, and not other factors, that preclude all reasonable use of the subject property; d) The applicant has in no way created or exacerbated the condition that forms the limitation on the use of the subject property, nor in any way contributed to such limitation; and e) The waiver or modification will not lead to, create, nor significantly increase the risk of injury or death to any person or damage to improvements on or off the subject property. Any approval or waiver of requirements must be the minimum possible impacts to the function and values and/or risks associated with proposed improvements on affected critical areas. The city may impose limitations, mitigation under an approved mitigation plan, conditions and/or restrictions it considers appropriate to reduce or eliminate any undesirable effects or adverse impacts of granting a request under this section. Mitigation Plan Third Party Review — The proposal will be subject to third party review by the city's consultant at the expense of the applicant. City consultants will review the impact of the proposed development in relation to the proposed mitigation sequencing (attempts to minimize and avoid impacts to the wetland buffer) and mitigation plan. Mitigation plans/wetland buffer enhancements must include item and analysis listed in FWRC 19.145.140 prior to a Process III `Project Approval' decision. Meeting follow-up: Per the submitted preapplication plans, the applicant shall reduce the proposed building footprint to 1,500 to 1,600 square feet. As proposed, the building footprint exceeds this. The applicant will still achieve some reasonable use of the subject property with a two-story building (i.e. 2,500-sq. ft. +/- of gross floor area). As indicated in the meeting the areas in the rear proposed for the kitchen must be eliminated. The applicant may also reduce overall intrusion into the wetland by locating the building 5 feet from eastern property line versus the 10 feet shown. Monitoring— Your proposal is subject to a monitoring program for assessing a completed project. 'fhe monitoring program shall be five years and the director may require a greater monitoring period depending on the overall scope of mitigation. Bonds — The proposal is subject to a performance, maintenance and monitoring bond for proposed work within a wetland buffer pursuant to FWRC 19.25. Your mitigation plans shall include a detailed bond estimate (cost, monitoring, peer review fees for monitoring plan/monitoring report if applicable). The performance bond shall be posted prior to obtaining building permit approval. Critical Area Notice on Title — The owner of any property containing critical areas or buffers on which a development proposal is submitted or any property on which mitigation is established as a result of development, except a public right-of-way or the site of a permanent public facility, shall file a notice approved by the city with the King County recorder's office. The required contents and form of the notice shall be determined by the director. The notice shall inform the public of the presence of critical areas, buffers or mitigation sites on the property, and that limitations on actions in or affecting such critical areas or buffers may exist. The notice shall run with the land. I8-102857-00-PC Doc. LD. 77997 Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 5of11 Critical area markers, signs and fences —Please depict permanent signs, approved by the city for high durability on your land use plans. Signs must be posted at an interval of one per lot or every 150 feet, whichever is less, and must be maintained by the property owner or homeowners' association in perpetuity. The wording, number and placement of the signs may be modified by the director based on specific site conditions. Please see the enclosed critical area signage standards. Permanent fencing shall be required at the outer edge of the critical area buffer in order to protect the functions of the critical areas and prevent future encroachment and unauthorized clearing and tree removal in the wetland buffer by future owners (FWRC 19.145.180(3)(iv) &(d). 7. Clearing, Grading, and Vegetation and Tree Retention —The proposal is subject to the provisions of FWRC 19.120, "Clearing, Grading, and Vegetation and Tree Retention." A clearing and grading plan that meets FWRC 19.120.020 and FWRC 19.120.040 must be submitted with the formal land use application, if clearing and grading work is proposed. Residential lots are subject to the tree density requirements of FWRC 19.120.130(1); note that 25 tree units per acre are required for single-family zoned sites, minus any regulated critical areas. Trees located within critical area buffers (but not within the wetland itself) can be credited towards satisfying the tree units per acre requirement. Tree unit credits are in table 2 of FWRC 19.120.130-2. The tree density calculation must be depicted on the wetland buffer enhancement planting plan, reasonable use site plan, and single family building permit site plan. 8. Application Fees —Please contact the Permit Center at 253-835-2607 or permitcenter@cityoffederalway.cam for updated fee schedules for land use applications, SEPA checklist, and building permit fees. 9. School Impact Fee —A school impact fee will be assessed at the time of building permit application for the new dwelling units. The fee amount is subject to change as determined annually by the Federal Way School District; please contact the Permit Center for current fees. PUBLIC WORKS — DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION Kevin Peterson, 253-835-2734, kevin.peterson@cityoffederalway.com Land Use Issues — Stormwater 1. For all new impervious surfaces created by the project (roof, driveway, and any required roadway improvements), stormwater runoff control and/or water quality treatment may be required. Refer to the City -adopted 2016 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) for any and al requirements that may apply. At the time of a land use process application, the site plan shall show any required storm drainage systems associated with the project. 2. If a flow control facility is required, the project lies within a Conservation flow control area, thus the applicant must design the flow control facility to meet this performance criteria. In addition to flow control facilities, Best Management Practices (BMP's) are required as outlined in the KCSWDM. The project site also lies within an Enhanced Basic Water Quality Area. Any Water Quality Treatment systems shall be designed to meet the treatment criteria of the Enhanced Basic Water Quality. Menu. Doc I D. 77997 18-102857-00-PC Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 6 of I I 3. If infiltration is proposed, soil logs prepared by a licensed geotechnical engineer or septic designer must be provided to verify infiltration suitability. 4. Show the proposed location and dimensions of all storm drainage systems on the preliminary plans. 5. If more than one acre will be disturbed during construction, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction storm water permit may be required. Information regarding this permit can be obtained from the Washington State Department of Ecology at litt ://www.ec .wa. oy/ ra ams/w /stonnwater/construction/index.htjnl or by calling 360-407- 6048. Right -of -Way Improvements 1. See the Traffic Division comments from Sarady Long, Sr. Transportation Planning Engineer, for traffic related items. 2. If dedication of additional right-of-way is required to install street frontage improvements, the dedication shall be conveyed to the City through a statutory warranty deed. The dedicated area must have clear title prior to recording. 3. All stormwater treatment and detention requirements outlined above will apply to any improvements within the public right-of-way. Building [or Engineering (EN)l Permit Issues 1. Engineered plans are required for clearing, grading, road construction, and utility work. Plans must be reviewed and approved by the City. Engineering review fees are $1,669.00 for the first 12 hours of review, and $139.00 per hour for additional review time. A final TIR shall be prepared for the project and submitted with the engineering plans. Both the TIR and the plans will require the signature/seal of a professional engineer registered/licensed in the State of Washington. 2. The Federal Way Public Works Development Standards Manual (including standard detail drawings, standard notes, and engineering checklists) is available on the City's website at the plans and TIR. Bonding is required for all street improvements and temporary erosion and sediment control measures associated with the project. The bond amount shall be 120 percent of the estimated costs of the improvements. An administrative fee deposit will need to accompany the bond to cover any possible legal fees in the event the bond must be called. Upon completion of the installation of the improvements, and final approval of the Public Works Inspector, the bond will be reduced to 30 percent of the original amount and held for a two-year maintenance period. 4. The developer will be responsible for the maintenance of all street systems during the two-year maintenance period. During that time, the Public Works Inspector will make periodic visits to the site to ensure the developer's compliance with the maintenance requirements. Upon satisfactory completion of the two-year maintenance period, the remainder of the bond will be released. Maintenance for public roads and subdivision drainage facilities then become the responsibility of the 18-102857-00-PC Doc I.D. 77997 Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 7 of 11 City. Maintenance for private roads and drainage facilities, including short plats, remain the responsibility of the individual property owners: 5. When topographic survey information is shown on the plans, the vertical datum block shall include the phrase "DATUM: N.G.V.D.-29" or "DATUM: K.C.A.S.," on al l sheets where vertical elevations are called out. 6, Drawings submitted for plan review shall be printed on 24" x 36" or 22" x 34" paper. Site plans shall be drawn at a scale of 1" = 20', or larger. Architectural scales are not permitted on engineering plans. 7. Provide cut and fill quantities on the clearing and grading plan. 8. Temporary Erosion and Sediment control (TESC) measures, per Appendix D of the 2016 KCSWDM, must be shown on the engineering plans. 9. The site plan shall show the location of any existing and proposed utilities in the areas affected by construction. PUBLIC WORKS — TRAFFIC DIVISION Sarady Long, 253-835-2743, sarady.long@cityoffederalway.com Transportation Concurrency Analysis (FWRC 19.90) 1. Based on the submitted materials for one Single Family Detached Housing, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation - 10`h Edition, land use code 210 (Single Family Detached Housing), the proposed project is estimated to generate approximately one (1) new weekday PM peak hour trips and 9 daily trips. 2. A concurrency permit is required for this development project. The PW Traffic Division will perform concurrency analysis to determine if adequate roadway capacity exists during the weekday PM peak period to accommodate the proposed development. Please note that supplemental transportation analysis and concurrency mitigation may be required if the proposed project creates an impact not anticipated in the six -year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The estimated fee for the concurrency permit application is $1,669.00 (less than 10 pm trips). This fee is an estimate and based,on the materials submitted for the preappIication meeting. The concurrency, application fee must be paid in full at the time the concurrency permit application is submitted with land use application. The fee may change based on the new weekday PM peak Dour trips as identified in the concurrency trip generation. The applicant has the option of having an independent traffic engineer prepare the concurrency analysis consistent with City procedures; however, the fee remains the same. Transportation Impact Fees (TIF) (FWRC 19.91) The current adopted traffic impact fee is $3,875 per lot. The total amount of the impact fees will be assessed and collected from the applicant when the building permit is issued, using the fee schedule then in effect. Doc, LD, 77997 18-102857-00-PC Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 8 of 1 1 Street Frontage Improvements (FWRC 19.135) The applicant/owner would be expected to construct street improvements consistent with the planned roadway cross -sections as shown in Map III-4 in Chapter III of the Federal Way Comprehensive Plan (FWCP) and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) shown as Table III-10 (FWRC 19.135.040). Based on the materials submitted, staff conducted a limited analysis to determine the required street improvements. The applicant would be expected to construct improvements on the following streets to the City's planned roadway cross -sections: ■ SW 354t" Place shall be a Type "W" street, consisting of a 28-foot street with curb and gutter, 4-foot planter strips with street trees, 5-foot sidewalks and street lights in a 52-foot right-of-way (ROW). Assuming a symmetrical cross section, 2' right-of-way dedication and half street improvements are required as measured from the street centerline. ■ If the applicant is proposing to have a shared driveway on SW 356t1i St, it shall be a minimum of 16' paved in 20' easement (DWG. NO. 3-2CC for two lots). A turnaround is required and shall meet the South King Fire and Rescue Administrative Policy 10.006. 2. The applicant may make a written request to the Public Works Director to modify, defer, or waive the required street improvements (FWRC 19.135.070). These modification requests have a nominal review fee currently at $278 plus recording fee. 3. Tapers and transitions beyond the project frontage may be required as deemed necessary for safety purposes. The taper rate shall be WS2/60 or as directed by the Public Works Director. Access Management (FWRC 19.135) Access management standards are based on roadway safety and capacity requirements. FWRC 19.135.280 provides access standards for streets based on planned roadway cross -sections. 2. Driveways that serve only residential use may not be located closer than 25 feet to any street intersection. Driveways-servtn&asinglefamily-dwelhng-anit-abutt rgtwo-streets lrould b at lea 2 etfrom the beginning of the street radius. 4. No street, or combination of streets, shall function as a cul-de-sac longer than 600 feet (FWRC 18.55.010). COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT — BUILDING DIVISION Scott Sproul, Building Official, 253-835-2633, Scott.Sproul@cityoffederalway.com Each lot requires a separate Building Permit Application. Please contact the Permit Center for building permit submittal requirements at permitcenter@cityoffederalway.com or 253-835-2607. A soils report will be required when building permits are applied for. Test pits are required for each lot if submitting one soils report for all five lots. I8-102857-00-PC Doc. I.D. 77997 l Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 9 of 11 The information provided is based on limited plans and information. The comments provided are not intended to be a complete plan review and further comments are possible at time of building permit plan review. LAKEHAVEN WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT — SEWER COMMENTS ONLY Brian Asbury, 253-946-5407, BAsbury@lakehaven.org Water • A Water Certificate of Availability issued separately by Lakehaven may be required to be submitted with any land use and/or building permit applications (check with land use agency for requirement). Certificate is valid for one (1) year from date of issuance. If Certificate is needed, allow 1-2 work days to issue for typical processing. 2018 cost for a Water Certificate of Availability is $60.00. • Fire Flow at no less than 20 psi available within the existing water distribution system is a minimum of 1,000 GPM (approximate) for two (2) hours or more. This flow figure represents Lakehaven's adopted minimum level of service goals for residential areas regarding performance of the existing water distribution system under high demand conditions. If more precise available fire flow figures are required or desired, Applicant can request Lakehaven perform a system hydraulic model analysis (separate from, or concurrent with, an application for Availability). 2018 cost for a system hydraulic model analysis is $220.00. • A water service connection application submitted separately to Lakehaven is required for each new service connection to the water distribution system, in accordance with standards defined in Lakehaven's current `Fees and Charges Resolution'. ` • Based on the proposal submitted, preliminary estimated Lakehaven water service connection fees/charges/deposits (2018 schedule) will be as follows. Actual connection charges will be determined upon submittal of service connection application(s) to Lakehaven. All Lakehaven fees, charges and deposits are typically reviewed & adjusted (if necessary) annually, and are subject to change without notice. • Water Service/Meter Installation. 1" preliminary size: $4,430.00 deposit. Actual size TBD by Lakehaven based on UPC plumbing fixture count. • Capital Facilities Charge(s)-Water: $4,018.39. • ROW Permit Fee (City of Federal Way): $770.00, Sewer • A Sewer Certificate of Availability issued separately by Lakehaven may be required to be submitted with any land use and/or building permit applications (check with land use agency for requirement). Certificate is valid for one (1) year from date of issuance. If Certificate is needed, allow 1-2 work days to issue for typical processing. 2018 cost for a Sewer Certificate of Availability is $60.00. • A separate Lakehaven Sewer Service Connection Permit is required for each new connection to the sanitary sewer system, in accordance with standards defined in Lakehaven's current `Fees and Charges Resolution'. Minimum pipe slope for gravity sewer service connections is 2%. Any work in public right- of-way or Lakehaven easement requires use of a Lakehaven-authorized sewer service contractor. • Based on the proposal submitted, preliminary estimated Lakehaven sewer service connection fees/chargWdeposits (2018 schedule) will be as follows. Actual connection charges will be determined upon submittal of service connection application(s) to Lakehaven. All Lakehaven fees, charges and deposits are typically reviewed & adjusted (if necessary) annually, and are subject to change without notice. Doc. LD, 77997 18-102857-00-PC Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 10 of 1 1 o Sewer Service Connection Permit: $303.52 fee. o Capital Facilities Charge(s)-Sewer: $3,803.76. o ROW Permit Fee (City of Federal Way): $770.00. General • All Lakehaven Development Engineering related application forms, and associated standards information, can be accessed at Lakehaven's Development Engineering web pages (http://www.lakehaven.arg/204/Development-Engineering). ■ All comments herein are valid for one (1) year and are based on the proposal(s) submitted and Lakehaven's current regulations and policies. Any change to either the development proposal(s) or Lakehaven's regulations and policies may affect the above comments accordingly. SOUTH KING FIRE AND RESCUE Chris Cahan, 253-946-7243, chris.cahan(a4southkingfire.ora Gordon Goodsell, 253-946-7241, Gordon.Goodsell @,,soirthkin lire.or Water Supply Fire Flow: The required fire flow for this project is 1000 gallons per minute for residence not exceeding 3600 square feet including garage and covered areas. A Certificate of Water Availability including a hydraulic fire flow model* shall be requested from the water district and provided at the time of building permit application. *A hydraulic fire flow model is required for single family residences that exceed 3600 square feet including garages and covered areas. Fire Hydrants: Existing fire hydrant meets hydrant location requirements Emergency Access Fire apparatus access roads shall comply with all requirements of Fire Access Policy 10.006 h .//southkii ire.or ocumentCenter/HomeNiew/24 and enclosed. —Fire H—n-0er System - Requirements for residential fire sprinklers, if any, are determiened at the time of the building permit submittal. CLOSING This letter reflects the information provided at the preapplication meeting and is intended to assist you in preparing plans and materials for formal application. We hope you found the comments useful to your project. We have made every effort to identify major issues to eliminate surprises during the City's review of the formal application. The completion of the preapplication process in the content of this letter does not vest any future project application. Comments in this letter are only valid for one year as per FWRC 19.40.070 (4). As you know, this is a preliminary review only and does not take the place of the full review that will follow submission of a formal application. Comments provided in this letter are based on preapplication materials submitted. 18-102857-00-PC Doc, LD. 77997 Mr. & Mrs. Shablevskiy August 3, 2018 Page 11 of 1 I Modifications and revisions to the project as presented for this preapplication may influence and modify information regarding development requirements outlined above. In addition to this preapplication letter, please examine the complete FWRC and other relevant codes carefully. Requirements that are found in the codes that are not addressed in this letter are still required for your project. If you have questions about an individual comment, please contact the appropriate department representative noted above. Any general questions can be directed towards the key project contact, Leila Willoughby -Oakes, 253-835-2644, leila.willoughby-oakes@cityoffederalway.com. We look forward to working with you. Sincerely. Leila Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner enc: Master Land Use Application Process III Checklist FWRC 19.145 `Critical Area Report' FWRC 19.145.090 `Reasonable use of the subject property' FWRC 19.145.130-140 `Mitigation Sequencing/Plan Requirements' Tree Unit Calculation Sheet Critical Area Signage Mailing Labels Handout Sign Installation Certificate ROW Modification Information South King Fire Access Handout Lakehaven Enclosures c: Lyle Kenny, emailed: l kitke nVO mail. m (Owner) Doug Williams, Keller Williams Realty, emailed: dou ic0 oteamred.cam (Agent) Kevin Peterson, Engineering Plans Reviewer Sarady Long, Sr. Transportation Planning Engineer Scott Sproul, Building Official, emailed Brian -Asbury; Lakehaven-Water &Sewer-Diiiti'iWaMT04 - - - - - — Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue, emailed Doc I D. 77997 18-102857-00-PC J- A0 J4 ��4��5 ' - r G SST _ 66 - fc, Leila Willoughby -Oakes From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2018 10:48 AM To: 'dimaconstruction@yahoo.com' Subject: SHABLEVSKIY Reasonable Use (APN#302104-9007) Greetings, n Lt Erne-u C?-&G— Thank you for your inquiry yesterday regarding tax parcel no. 302104 9007 relating to preapplication file 18-102857-00- PC A patio would be considered development; which is an intrusion/disturbance to the wetland buffer. For the purposes this would exceed the 1,600 sf area of disturbance proposed for your project and is not permitted- although it has slats - the construction of said deck would require clearing and development actions in the wetland buffer. As confirmed over the counter, the property also cannot be subdivided into to two lots on account of the critical area encumbrances. Let me know if you have any. Do contact the listed reviewer associated with each section in the preapplication document if you have questions. Unfortunately, city staff cannot conduct project pre -reviews or pre -approvals until a formal application is submitted to the city- as proposals are reviewed on a first come first served basis. I have forwarded your right of way question to Public Works reviewers. Thank you, Leila ***Due to permit volumes, first review targets on a first come first served basis are 3-6 weeks from submission/ resubmission. *** I am on vacation Nov. 16-26. L. Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.citvoffedera Iway .co m Planner on Duty 253-835-2655 or In in ui cit offederalwa .cam Permit Center 253-835-2607 or permit.center citvofPederaiway.com Applications httip-//www.cityoffederalway.com/node/1547 NOTICE: All emails, and attachments, sent to and from the City of Federal Way are public records and may be subject to disclosure pursuant to the Public Records Act (RCW 42.56) 1 i CITY OF Federal Way July 26, 2018 9:00 a.m. Pre -application Conference Sign in Sheet COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMWrTEE City Hall Hvlebos Room Project Name: Shablevskiy Reasonable UseMetland Buffer Reduction w/ Enhancement Address: *No Site Address* SW 350 Street File Number: 18-102857-00-PC NAME DEPARTMENT I DIVISION TELEPHONE NUMBER 1. Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Associate Planner Planning/Community Development 253-835-2644 Leila.Willoughb - Oakes@cityoffederalwn.com C�\� \\',off P.� • 2. I)ZJ '&A L-Q s - ��. ��,�S• �s3- $3s- a-73 a a L\ '1 3. f�2�u"i z Fe.,�l4 ��,i �s.. �/ =cue- Z-S-2- 1 2-13 k�',�• L ,�, c.�i l�e. 4. :B(Z l A Sla v (Zy P l5 l 2(c_T g146 - S4d'7 N58V oeYf MX610fV60 . 5.got �+�� T�, • jr+� ` Z153 0,4<-, 72 43 •� :z; . 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. )m Page 1 of 2 From: lion Logan < I Logan @esassoc.com> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2016 3:12 PM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Subject: RE: Kenny Properties Peer Review, Federal Way (15-103923-AD) Hi Leila, I looked over the revised report and it appears all of ESA's comments have been addressed. I agree with the wetland rating, including the habitat score, and the standard buffer of 105 feet. I think it is okay that Figure 1 of the rating form has not been revised because the others have been. If the applicant seeks a state permit (which would require a review by Ecology) then they will need to revise the figure, but I am fine with the current submittal. Let me know if you need anything else from me. No additional fees are required (hopefully obvious). Thanks much, lion From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes [mailta:Leila illou hb -Oakes t offe &ralway.coml Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 1:06 PM To: Ilon Logan Cc: Cynthia Pham Subject: Kenny Properties Peer Review, Federal Way (15-103923-AD) Good afternoon lion, Please find a scan of Critical Area Report of the Kenny Properties 922 SW 356th St. (revised June 13, 2016). After reviewing the report, Wetlands Northwest LLC did revise the document to address ESA's review memorandum dated May 5, 2016. On page 2 of 5 of your memo it stated ESA's biologists found Wetland A and B resulted in one wetland unit rather than two separate wetland units: "Based on our observations during the site visit, we generally agree with the wetland boundaries as flagged by Wetlands Northwest LLC. However, ESA's investigation found evidence for connecting the southwest boundary of Wetland A and the northwest boundary of Wetland B near the west side of the parcel, resulting in one wetland unit rather than two separate wetlands (Photos 2 to 4)." Figure 1-'Cowardin Plant Classes 2012 USGS Aerial' has not been revised to show the proper wetland boundary. Also do state in your findings if you concur with the applicant's habitat score assessment of 21 points for a Category II and buffer of 105 ft. If you require additional fees for reviews please advise and we will inform the applicant and receive payment before proceeding. A formal letter and hard -copy of the study will follow in the mail. If you have any questions do not hesitate to call me. As always thanks for your help, Leila L. Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner file:///C:/Users/lwilloughbyoakes/Downloads/Kenny%20Properties%20Third%20Party%20... 4/5/2018 Page 2 of 2 1-0 cid:image004.jpg@01 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.tli yofiederaIway, com file:///C:/Users/lwilloughbyoakes/Downloads/Kenny%20Properties%20Third%20Party%20... 4/5/2018 t Wetlands Northwest LLC CRITICAL AREA REPORT of the Kenny Properties 922 SW 356 Properties Federal Way, WA 98023 Tax Parcel Numbers: 302104-9076, -9079 and -9007 NW Section 30, Township 21N, Range 04E, Prepared for: Lyle Kenny 65 12th Ave. Milton, WA 98354 Dated: June 30, 2015 Revised June 13, 2016 Prepared by: Robert King, Professional Wetland Scientist RESUBMITTED Robert King JUL 2 0 2016 CITY OF FEDERAL WAY CDS 5218 Ivanhoe PL NE Seattle, WA 98105 206-456-5474 www.wettandsnw.com Lyle Kenny Table of Contents 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND SITE DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................................1 2.0 PROPOSED USE..............................................................................................................................................................1 3.0 METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................................................................................1 4.0 ON -SITE INVENTORIES...................................................................................................................................................3 5.0 RESULTS...........................................................................................................................................................................3 5.1 WETLANDS....................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 6.0 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................................................................3 7.0 LIMITATIONS AND USE OF THIS REPORT...................................................................................................................3 6.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................................................7 Figures 1.0 Vicinity Map....................................................................,.......................................................... 2 2.0 NRCS Soils Map........................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 Wetland and Streams Inventories............................................................................................... 5 4.0 Wetland Map (2012 Aerial)......................................................................................................... 6 Attachments Wetland Data Forms Wetland Rating Forms June 2016 Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny 1.0 Introduction and Site Description The address for the site is the 922 SW 3561h Street, in Federal Way (see Figure 1 Vicinity Map, page 2). Ingress and egress is a driveway from SW 356th Street along the property's southern boundary. The three parcels combined is rectangular -shaped, measures approximately 165 feet wide by 634 feet deep and covers an approximate area of 2.38 acres in the RS7.2 Zone. The front parcel (302104-9076) has a single family home originally constructed in 1956 that consists of a driveway and landscaping. The northern two parcels are vacant and are comprised of a mixed forest. 2.0 Proposed Use This critical area report will be used to determine the encumbrances of the on -site critical areas for a future building permit. Wetlands Northwest LLC visited the property on June 17, 2015 for data collection. Wetlands Northwest LLC re -visited the property on June 8, 2016, to revise the wetland boundaries per the City Of Federal Way recommendations dated May 10, 2016. 3.0 Methodology The routine methodology described in the Army Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987) was utilized during site investigations to make a determination regarding wetlands, as required by King County. Wetlands Northwest LLC also evaluated the site using the U,S. Army Corps of Engineers Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region produced in 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "the Corps Regional Supplement"). The Corps Regional Supplement provides technical guidance and procedures for identifying and delineating wetlands that may be subject to regulatory jurisdiction under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. According to the federal methodology described above, identification of wetlands is based on a three -factor approach involving indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and presence or indications of hydrology. Using the subject manuals, the site characteristics for making a wetland determination include the following: 1.) Examination of the site for hydrophytic vegetation (species present/percent cover); 2.) Examination for the presence of hydric soils in areas where hydrophytic vegetation is present; and 3.) Examination to determine if adequate hydrology exists for sufficient durations during the early part of the growing season in the same locations as the previous two steps. Except where noted in the manuals, the approach requires positive indicators of hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology for a determination that an area is a wetland. Wetlands are rated using the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington 2014 update. The critical areas section of the City of Federal Way Code is in the process of incorporating the 2014 methodology within the year. Wetlands Northwest LLC also reviewed the King County Wetland Inventory GIS data, The City of Federal Way Critical Areas Map, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) GIS data, the National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) GIS data, the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soils data and aerial data obtained by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). Data points for soil profiles were labeled as DP-1 through DP-5. Wetland Points A-1 through A-26 and B-1 through B-21 are depicted on Figure 4. All data points and wetland boundaries depicted in Figure 4 are an approximation. June 2016 Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny N Figure 1 - Vicinty Map 1 inch equals 0 25 miles Miles 0 0 125 0.25 0.5 �r i. Ali =ws�. .o-{ .`1p 1.{lllli i: �. �, `j .`•i:�:I SW +! ST Vs' •i3.. iafl. ti PAL . $ '444!jft 13 PA 1 t _+1 ` itkw w ur S%fv, 9461 H S1 A- t y J' o 6,w J �' �. ,M, .14 7 1 PL ;r V� 317TN S a ST a I 3-111TH S-1 Ste' 349`fH S sw :i 'i 11 S v u s Oj z. �, w. +.r- k i G 72— v; SW Sari tV 3' T. i. T W 354TI!. „T S Q + Y r7 SW �571•l�I, m Iry 35Q 7 TH --V w $y S i.5i TH ST r cR S 2!T1-I S "IF _U u to n cC a w r.j�1Yi C 26T H, 5T. F X . r - w- -SW , ii TII S I � G � 2 7 �LV G"5 ST 4�r !c MAOro ..: al k :y Legend .303, I Sk eel "; a 5 .3u3ld ret sir: WTl f i SW 365TH -T � Site W S � s lu I'•'`; r, sTNE Roads E _ SW3G6Tr F y. Tax Parcels Grerrat 36PTH ST City of Federal My I > 3 City of Tacoma t a' u ul r71 4 Parks June 2016 2 Wetlands Northvrest LLC Lyle Kenny 4.0 On -site Inventories According to the NRCS King County soils survey, the property is mapped as Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 0 to 5% slopes (AgB), (see Figure 2 NRCS Soils Map, page 4). During site investigation the Alderwood profiles were confirmed as accurate (see DP-2, DP-3 and DP-5) along with several auger borings sampled throughout the property. The Alderwood soil profile is described as follows: The Alderwood series is made up of moderately well drained soils that have a weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 to 40 inches. These soils are on uplands. They formed under conifers, in glacial deposits. In a representative profile, the surface layer and subsoil are very dark brown (10YR 2/2), dark -brown (10YR 3/3), and grayish brown (10YR 5/2) gravelly sandy loam about 27 inches thick. The substratum is grayish -brown (10YR 512), weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated glacial till that extends to a depth of 60 inches and more. According to the King County, NWI and DNR inventories, there are no wetlands or streams within the 225-foot study area. The City of Federal Way Critical Areas Map has a wetland inventoried on parcel 302104-9007 (see Figure 3 Wetlands and Streams Inventory Map, page 5). 5.0 Results 5.1 Wetlands One wetland (Wetland AB) was delineated on tax parcel 302104-9007. The area with "B" flagging is a small topographic depression that drains north into a closed depression indentified with "A" flagging. Wetland AB is rated as Category II scoring 21 points overall which includes54 habitat points (see attached wetland rating). Category II wetlands require a 105-foot buffer with 5 habitat points per the City of Federal Way Proposed Critical Are Code update per Chapter 19.145.420 (see Figure 4 Wetland Sketch and Buffer, page 6). 6.0 Conclusion There is a Category II wetland on tax parcel 302104-9007 that has a 105-foot buffer. Buffer impacts will likely arise from a proposed building permit. A future applicant may utilize Section 19.145.090 of the Code to customize buildable lots on the two vacant parcels through the Reasonable Use process. 7.0 Limitations and Use of this Report This report is supplied to Lyle Kenny as a means of determining the critical area encumbrances for future development. Wetlands Northwest LLC upheld professional industry standards when completing this review. The information included in this report constitutes a professional opinion and does not guarantee approval by any federal, state, and/or local permitting agencies. The laws applicable to Critical Areas are subject to varying interpretations. The work for this report has conformed to the standard of care employed by professional ecologists in the Puget Sound region. No other representation or warranty, expressed or implied, is made concerning the work or this report. This report is based largely on readily observable conditions and, to a lesser extent, on readily ascertainable conditions. No attempt has been made to determine hidden or concealed conditions. If hidden or concealed conditions arise, the information contained in this report may change based upon those conditions. June 2016 3 Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny N Figure 2 - NRCS Soils Map 1 inch equals 200 feet A -- Feet 0 100 200 400 AgC Dp Ag6 Legend ] Site KC Tax Parcels NRCS Soils MUSYM AgB - Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 0 to 6 percent AgC - Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 6 to 15 percent AgD-Alderwood gravelly sandy loam 15 to 30 percent EvD - Everett gravelly sandy loam, 15 to 30 percent slopes June 2016 AgD AgC 17 EvD Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny Figure 3 - Wetlands and Stream Inventory Map June 2016 N 1 inch equals 200 feet Feet 0 100 200 400 Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny Figure 4 - Wetland Sketch and Buffer N 2012 JSGS Aerial 1 inch equals 100 feet Feet 0 50 100 200 June 2016 6 Wetlands Noiihwest LLC Lyle Kenny 8.0 References Cowardin, et al, 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Dee water Habitats of the United States U.S.D.I. Fish and Wildlife Service. FWS/OBS-79/31. December 1979. Environmental Laboratory. (1987). Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual," Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss. Hruby, T. (2014). Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washin tan: 2014 Update. (Publication #14-06-029). Olympia, WA: Washington Department of Ecology. Cii of Federal Wa Code Cha ter 19.145 Critical Areas (Proposed Update). City of Federal Way, htt :l ~. ityoffederalway.comlindex.as x?NIQ=640 National Wetland Plant List 2014, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Snyder et al. 1979 King County Soils Survey. United States Department of Agriculture, National Resource Conservation Service. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2010). "Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Western Mountains, Valleys, and Coast Region (Version 2.0)," ERDC/EL TR-10-3, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, MS. June 2016 7 Wetlands Northwest LLC Lyle Kenny ATTACHMENTS June 2016 8 Wetlands Northwest LLC Wetland name or number) RATING SUMMARY - Western Washington Name of wetland or ID # : ISI ( ) �� { �[� vol �_ �� _ _ _-- -- Date of site visit: <o`-I?"� �Di.��E 2 Rated by rh Trained by Ecology? V"'Y' es _No Date of training 1'2- fG j 1 L4 HGM Class used for rating Dep re-Wic4rcxl Wetland has multiple HGM classes?_Y V N NOTE: Form is not complete without the figures requested (figures can be combined). Source of base aerial photo/map Zr,J Z. OVERALL WETLAND CATEGO�* (based on functions_ or special characteristics_) 1. Category of wetland based on FUNCTIONS Category I —Total score = 23 - 27 Category II — Total score = 20 - 22 Category III —Total score = 16 - 19 Category IV — Total score = 9 - 15 1 FUk_T'10_N I_Irnprovmg I Hydrdlogic f Habita� Water Quality - — Site Potential H L cycle the appropriate ror+ ngs H L H L i lie Landscape Potential H L M L H M Value H M L H M OL H M L T Score Based on xq J,�SIRatings �1 J` 2. Category based on SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS of wetland 0 CHARACTERI5TJC Estuarine CATEGORY 1 II Wetland of High Conservation Value Bog I I Mature Forest I Old Growth Forest 1 Coastal Lagoon Interdunal i Non-e of the above — I II I 11 [if IV Wedand Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Score for each function based on three ratings (order of ratings is not important) 9 = H,H,H 8 = H,H,M 7 = H,H,L 7 = H,M,M 6 = H,M,L 6 = M,M,M 5 = H,L,L 5 = M, M, L 4 = M,L,L 3 = L, L, L 1 Wetland name or number Maps and figures required to answer questions correctly for Western Washington Depressional Wetlands Mapbf: TOIzanswerquestio'hs7. :f gulFe ' Cowardin plant classes _ Hydroperiods D 1.3, H 1.1, H 1.4 D 1.4, H 1.2 Location of outlet (can be added to map of hydroperiods) D 1. 1, D 4.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to onother(igure) D 2.2, D 5.2 Map of the contributing basin D 4.3, D 5.3 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 5creen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) D 3.1, D 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) D 3.3 Riverine Wetlands Map.af: T, qnswr,:c�,N§tit,. •,' H 1. 1, H 1.4 Ei ure'# Cowardin plant classes w _ _ _ Hydroperiods H 1.2 - Ponded depressions R 1.1 Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to anotherfiqure) _ R 2.4 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants R 1.2, R 4.2 Width of unit vs. width of stream (can be added to another figure) R 4.1 Map of the contributing basin R 2.2, R 2.3, R 5.2 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (.from Ecology websiteJ R 3.1 ` R 3.2, R 3.3 - ---- Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) Lake Fringe Wetlands _Map•of: T.&answer u_estion5� _ Fi weft Cowardin plant classes L 1.1, L 4.1, H 1.1, H 1.4 - L 1.2 Plant cover of trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants Boundary of area within 150 ft of the wetland (can be added to onotherfigure) 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat L 2.2 H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 _ Screen capture of map of 303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) L 3.1, L 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) _ L 3.3 Slope Wetlands iViap fit; ft answer,question : Figure;# . _ _ Cowardin plant classes _ H 1.1, H 1.4 Hydroperiods H 1.2 Plant cover of dense trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants S 1.3 S 4.1 Plant cover of dense, rigid trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants (can be added to figure above) Boundary of 150 ft buffer (can be added to another figure) S 2.1, S 5.1 1 km Polygon: Area that extends 1 km from entire wetland edge - including polygons for accessible habitat and undisturbed habitat H 2.1, H 2.2, H 2.3 Screen capture of rnap of303(d) listed waters in basin (from Ecology website) S 3.1, S 3.2 Screen capture of list of TMDLs for WRIA in which unit is found (from web) 5 3.3 Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number AZ(41 HGM Classification of Wetlands in Western Washington hor questions 1-7, the,criteria described Mus,'t apply to the entire unit being rated. If Cho hydrologic criteria listed in each questiap do not apply to,th'e e-ndre unit being rated, you probably have a unit with multiple -HGM classes. In this case, identify which hydrologic criteria in questions 11 ap:ply,, aridlb M Question 8, 1. Are the water levels in the entire unit usually controlled by tides except during floods? NO) -go to 2 YES - the wetland class is Tidal Fringe - go to 1.1 1.1 Is the salinity of the water during periods of annual low flow below 0.5 ppt (parts per thousand)? f,;_7Saltwater Tidal Fringe (Estuarine) YES - Freshwater Tidal Fringe r wetland can be classified as a Freshwater Tidal Fringe use the forms for Riverine wetlands. If it is Saltwater Tidal Fringe it is an Estuarine wetland and is not scored. This method cannot be used to score functions for estuarine wetlands, 2. The entire wetland unit is flat and precipitation is the only source (>90%) of water to it. Groundwater and surface water runoff are NOT sources of water to the unit. �NO k go to 3 YES - The wetland class is Flats elf ,our wetland can be classified as a Flats wetland, use the form for Depressional wetlands. 3. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? _The vegetated part of the wetland is on the shores of a body of permanent open water (without any plants on the surface at any time of the year) at least 20 ac (8 ha) in size, _At least 30% of the open water area is deeper than 6.6 ft (2 m). :—\ (N0�- go to 4 YES - The wetland class is Lake Fringe (Lacustrine Fringe) 4. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The wetland is on a slope (slope can be very gradual), The water flows through the wetland in one direction (unidirectional) and usually comes from seeps. It may flow subsurface, as sheetflow, or in a swale without distinct banks, The water leaves the wetland without being impounded. aNOgo to 5 YES - The wetland class is Slope NOTE: Surface water does not pond in these type of wetlands except occasionally in very small and shallow depressions or behind hummocks (depressions are usually <3 ft diameter and less than 1 ft deep). S. Does the entire wetland unit meet all of the following criteria? The unit is in a valley, or stream channel, where it gets inundated by overbank flooding from that stream or river, _The overbank flooding occurs -at least -once every 2 years. - - Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or numberb go to 6 YES -The wetland class is Riverine TE: The Riverine unit can contain depressions that are filled with water when the river is not flooding 6. Is the entire wetland unit in a tupographic depression in which water ponds, or is saturated to the surface, at sometime during the year? This means that any outlet, if present, is higher than the interior of the wetland. NO - go to 7 ( YES The wetland class is Depressional 7. Is the entire wetland unit located in a very flat area with no obvious depression and no overbank flooding? The unit does not pond surface water more than a few inches. The unit seems to be maintained by high groundwater in the area. The wetland may be ditched, but has no obvious natural outlet. NO/ go to 8 YES -The wetland class is Depressional 8, Your wetland unit seems to be difficult to classify and probably contains several different HGM classes. For example, seeps at the base of a slope may grade into a riverine floodplain, or a small stream within a Depressional wetland has a zone of flooding along its sides. GO BACKAND IDENTIFY WHICH OF THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMES DESCRIBED IN QUESTIONS 1-7 APPLY TO DIFFERENT AREAS IN THE UNIT (make a rough sketch to help you decide). Use the following table to identify the appropriate class to use for the rating systern if you have several HGM classes present within the wetland unit being scored. NOTE: Use this table only if the class that is recommended in the second column represents 10% or more of the total area of the wetland unit being rated. If the area of the HGM class listed in column 2 is less than 10% of the unit; classify the wetland using the class that represents more than 90% of the total area. HGM classes within the wetland unit being rated HGM Class td use in, rating Slope + Riverine Riverine Slope + Depressional Depressional Slope + Lake Fringe Lake Fringe Depressional + Riverine along stream within boundary of depression Depressional Depressional + Lake Fringe Depressional Riverine + Lake Fringe Riverine Salt Water Tidal Fringe and any other class of freshwater wetland Treat as ESTUARINE Ifyou are still unable to determine which of the above criteria apply toyour wetland, or ifyou have more than 2 HGM classes within a wetland boundary, classify the wetland as Depressional for the rating. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 4 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number \ f 5 -- J - — — - - QEPRESSiONAL AND FLATS WETLANDS Miter Quality Functioi7s^ i,riir. itc-�r : ti,�t t[�c �itc_ t�nctlor73 t� it il�roWe v�t�t�r 'tl lit�� D 1.0. Qoes the site h 0vn di & Potential t'o D 1.1. CharaCtP.rrsl[5 of surface water outflows fr m the wetlar7d: -Wetland is a depression or flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key) with no surface water- leaving it (no points = 3 Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowrn ppi s = 2 Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch. porn = D 1.2. The soil 2 In below the surface lor duff layer) is true clay or true organic (use NRCS definitions). Yes = 4 No = 0 D 13, Characteristics and distribution of per;'ss g.nt plane (Emergent, Scrub -shrub, and/or Forested Cowardin classes): Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants > 95% of area points = Wetland has persistent, ungrazed, plants Y, of area paints = Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants >'/10 of area points = 1 Wetland has persistent, ungrazed plants <'/io of area points = 0 — D 1.4. Characteristics of seasonal nonding or inundation: This is the area that is ponded for at least 2 months. See description in manual. Area seasonally ponded is > % total area of wetland t. p Area seasonally ponded is > X total area of wetland points = 2 Area seasonally ponded is <-Y4 total area of wetland points = 0 Total for D 1 Add the points in the boxes above -Rating of Site Potential If score is: � —.12-16 = H 11 = M -.0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page u 2, 0- LX)es t;IL, iardscap.e hay-ft Thv p:ott:rtit:iV r s'ljppprt th.p ,r,,, o gpal'tty function of the site? D 2.1. Does the wetland unit receive stormwater discharges? Yes = 1 No = 0 D 2.2. Is > 10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate pollutants? es = 1 No = 0 D 2.3. Are there septic systems within 250 ft of the wetland? Yes = 1 No =D Cs D 2.4. Are there other sources of pollutants coming into the wetland that are not listed in cluestrons D-.2...L0 2.3? Source' �� — -- t.t Yes = 1 fVo = 0 Total for D Zo Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:---3 or 4 = H _1 or z = IVI _u = L xecora me raring on rnei,rsi Nuye i. 3. 0, is the wiyLer q{ ldIi y irrrr)rcyvoment p'rliitJt,d UJ . IIre ,iLe J81ua�ile tQ 5�Cieiyl D 3A. Does the wetland discharge directly (i.e., within 1 ml) to a stream, river, lake, or marine water that is on 303(d) list? Yes = 1 1�0= 0) D 3.2. Is the wetland in a basin or sub -basin where an aquatic resource is on the 303(d) list? Yes =1 No = 0 D 3.3 Has the site been identified in a watershed or local plan as important for maintaining water quiy� nswer YES if there is a TMDL for the basin in which the unit is found)? ^ - _ Yes = 2 No = 0 Total for D 3 Add the points in thboxe e s above Rating of Value If sco re ls: 124 = H _1 = M _0 = L Record the rating on the first page Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 5 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 12, Wetland name or number.A_V_� - ' DEPRESSIQNAL AND`'FLATS WETl:ANa$ - l�vdf(i( $IC:�tJllCki(lfi5 i"rl.l.t.dt r, t-13r7i rlt� 5itf? ,lfl.lC.t1�11't tU F4 f1[:.0 FIG[].C}Ifl; •�r7U +ES'f1riF=1 [i'Cf?!'i3[:� 11^r1 4.0- Lees the Site. hayv tilt? puientlak t0 reduce flooding aIA erosion? D 4.1. Characteristics of surface water 0 u 111Owows frortf the wetland: Wetland is a depression or fiat depression with no surface water leaving it (no outlet) an Wetland has an intermittently flowing stream or ditch, OR highly constricted permanently flowing out Wetland is a flat depression (QUESTION 7 on key), whose outlet is a permanently flowing ditch peinss - Wetland has an unconstricted, or slightly constricted, surface outlet that is permanently flowing points = 0 D 4.2, pep L of storage during wet aerioft; Estimate the height of ponding above the bottom of the outlet. For wetlands with no outlet, measure from the surface of permanent water or if dry, the deepest Part - Marks of ponding are 3 ft or more above the surface or bottom of outlet points = 7 Marks of ponding between 2 ft to < 3 ft from surface or bottom of outlet paints - 5 Marks are at least 0.5 ft to < 2 ft From surface or bottom of outlet pain = The wetland is a "headwater" wetland points = 3 Wetland is flat but has small depressions on the surface that trap water points = 1 Marks of ponding less than 0.5 ft (6 in) points = 0 D 4.3. Contribution of the wetland to stUrape in ell watershed: Estimate the ratio of the area of upstream basin contributing surface water to the wetland to the area of the wetland unit itself. The area of the basin is less than 10 times the area of the unit Points = 5 The area of the basin is 10 to 100 times the area of the unit point = 3 The area of the basin is more than 100 times the area of the unit points = 0 Entire wetland is in the Flats class paints = 5 Total for D 4 Add the points in the boxes above Rntino of Site Potential If score is. V 12.16 = H LT 6-11= M 0-5 = L Record the rating on the first page re. 4.0 Does the la.rsdse:a.pe have the } of r�lial•:te.s.up.{�art hydro ogic f.uri bons of the, sitp? D 5.1, Does the iketland receive stormwater discharges? Yes = ] No, = 0 D 5.2. Is >10% of the area within 150 ft of the wetland in land uses that generate excess runoff? Yes = No = 0 D 5-3 Is more than 25% of the contributing basin of the wetland covered with intensive human land us residential at >1 res'sdencela[., urban, commercial, agriculture, etc-)? Yes = 1) No = 0 f Total for D 5 Add the points in the boxes above 3 Rating of Landscape Potential If score is:*L/ 3 = H _---._1 or 2 = M _O = L Record the rating on the rirst page D 6,01 Are tft!�' hydrr,•)P&� c funs buns provided by the.? site v.aIuable tc.soci0y? D 6.1. Thg unit is in -a landscapethat has ffoo.dint: ❑roblems. Choose the description that best matches conditions around the wetland unit being rated. Do not add points. Choose the highest score if more than dpe condirion is mer. The wetland captures surface water that would otherwise flow down -gradient into areas where flooding has damaged human or natural resources (e.g., houses or salmon redds): • Flooding occurs in a sub -basin that is immediately down -gradient of unit, points = 2 • Surface flooding problems are in a sub -basin farther down -gradient. points = 1 Flooding from groundwater is an issue in the sub -basin, points =1 The existing or potential outflow from the wetland is so constrained by human or natural conditions that the water stored by the wetland cannot reach areas that flood, Explain why points = 0 There are no problems with flooding downstream of the wetland. points 0 () D 6.2. Has the site been identified as important for flood storage or flood conveyance in a regional flood control )I;[ ? Yes= No=O Total for D 6 Add the points in the boxes above v Rating of Value If score is:-2-4 = H _1 = M J a = L Wetland Rating System For Western WA: 2014 Update Rating Form - Effective fanuary 1, 201-5 Record -Me rat{rig mi the flrst page 6 Wetland name or number These questions apply to weilands of all HG'M slasse!i: HARiTAT 3~URC�I9NS lndic;ator•_s # to rv> o'v;[ir. i171110.1; #,grit .itril)it t ri l.ii, t+ne tYr Sir>~ I�a�t tr,e potential tc, provfdr h�alalE lE H 1.1, Structure of plant community: indicators or; cowardin classes and strata within the Forested class. Check the Cowardin plant classes in the wetland. Lip to 10 patches maybe combined for each class to meet the threshold of Y oc or more than 10% of the unit if it is smaller than 2.5 ac. Add the number of structures checked. /aquatic bVE] 4 structures or more: points = 4 IV' Emergent t s ructures .aims = tf 5c�ub srirub (areas where shrubs have > 30% cover) sI rircLtires points =1 Forested (areas where trees have > 30% cover) 1 structure: points = 0 If the unit has a Forested class, check rf.. The Forested class has 3 out of 5 strata (canopy, sub -canopy, shrubs, herbaceous, moss/ground-cover) that each cover 20%withln the Forested polygon H 1.2. Hydroperiods Check.the types of water regimes (hydroperiods) present within the wetland. The water regime has to cover mar than 101% of the wetland or '4 ac to count (see text for descriptions of hydroperiods). eranently flooded or inundated 4 or more types present: points = 3 ,than easolially flooded or inundated 3 types pr2jeniLvoints = 2 occasionally flooded or inundated 2 lypes resent Inomts = _Saturated only t t type pr- ints =� Permanently flowing stream or river in, or adjacent to, the wetland -- ---� _Seasonally flowing stream in, or adjacent to, the wetland _Lake Fringe wetland 2 points Freshwater tidal wetland 2 points H 1.3, Richness of plant species Count the number of plant species in the wetland that cover at least 10 ftZ. afferent patches of the some species can be combined to meet the size threshold and you do not hove to name the species. Do not Include Eurasian milfoll, reed conarygrass, purple loosestrife, Canadian thistle if you counted: > 19 species points �2 5 -19 species points = ]' <5 species--pdrffCS =� H 1.4. Enlerslfersion of habitats Decide from the diagrams below whether interspersion among Cowardin plants classes (described in H 1.1), or the classes and unvegetated areas (can include open water or muciflats) is high, moderate, low, or none, if you have four ormore plant classes or three classes and open water, the rating is always high. None = 0 points Low = 1 point Moderate = 2 points All three diagrams e HIGH = 3point5 JAfetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 13 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 '�K 3 Wetland name or number .1 H 1.5. Special habitat features: Chgtk the habitat features that are present in the wet#and. The number of checks is the number of points. 9:nding ge, downed, woody debris within the wetland (> A in diameter and 6 ft long). snags (dbh > G in) within the wetland _Undercut banks are present for at least 6.6 ft (2 in) and/or overhanging plants extends at least 3.3 ft (1 m) over a stream (or ditch) in, or contiguous with the wetland, for at least 33 ft (10 M) _Stable steep banks of fine material that might be used by beaver or muskrat for denning (> 30 degree slope) OR signs of recent beaver activity are present (cut shrubs or trees that have not yet weathered where wood is exposed) At least % ac of thin -stemmed persistent plants or woody branches are present in areas that are permanently or seasonally inundated (structures for egg -laying by amphibians) VI Invasive plants cover less than 25% of the wetland area in every stratum of plants (see H 1.1 for list of Total for H 1 Add the points in the boxes above j Rating of Site Potential If score is:_15-18 = H 't:' 7-14 = M _0-6 = L Record the rating on the first page H 2.0. Does the landscape have the potential to support the habitat functions of the. site? H 2.1. Accessible habitat (include only habitat that directly obuts wetland unit) y� Calculate: J% undisturbed habitat-2- + [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2) = _ % If total accessible habitat is: > 1/3 (33.3%) of 1 km Polygon points = 3 20-33% of 1 km Polygon points = 2 10-191Y. of 1 km Polygon _I?1 irgr, _ < 10% of 1 km Poiygon T polnt:s = 0 H 2.2. Undisturbed habitat in 1 km Polygon around the wetland. Calculate: lot %undisturbed habitat+ [(% moderate and low intensity land uses)/2)�' _ `�� Undisturbed habitat > 50% of Polygon points = 3 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and in 1-3 patches points = 2 Undisturbed habitat 10-50% and > 3 patches i DoInts = r Undisturbed habitat < 10% of 1 km Polygon P ey H 2 3 Land use intensity in 1 km Polygon: If -- _1 > 50% of 1 km Polygon is high intensity land use points (2u 6 p's Imo' 5 50;flof 1 km Polygon is high intensity-pumts= 0 Total for H 2 Add the points in the boxes above Rating of Landscape Potential If score is: 4-6 = H 11-3 = M �; [ 1 = L Record the raying on the first page H 3.0'. is the habitat provided by t'lie site vale b(e to society? 'I H 3 1 Does the site provide habitat for species valued in laws, regulations, or policies? Choose only the highest -score that applies to the wetland being rated, Site meets ANY of the following criteria: points = 2 — It has 3 or more priority habitats within 100 m (see next page) — It provides habitat for Threatened or Endangered species (any plant or animal on the state or federal lists) — It is mapped as a location for an individual WDFW priority species — It is a Wetland of High Conservation Value as determined by the Department of Natural Resources — It has been categorized as an important habitat site in a local or regional comprehensive plan, in a Shoreline Master Plan, or in a watershed plan Site has 1 or 2 priority habitats (listed on next page) within 100 m points - 1 Site doses not Ratlne of Value If score is:_2 = H _JZ1 = M y2- 0 = L Wetland Rating System for Western W_1: 2014 Update 14 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 M i the first page Wetland name or number WDFW Priority Habitats Priority h hra_'tats listed by WiTFW_ (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be Found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington. 177 pp ka-JwdLwo ' f or access the list from here; �, : dfw K•a.eoulro�rvatiorti,Li7.115./iisrLj Count bow many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independent of the land use between the wetland unit and the priority habitat — Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha), Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wild]ife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). — Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches.of grass and fortis on shallow soils over bedrock. — Old-growth/Mature forests: Old -growth west of, sc es - Stands of at least 2 tree species, forminga multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or > 200 years of age. Mature forests - Stands with average diameters.exceedirig 21 in (S3 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak: Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 158 - see web link above). — Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. — Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, non -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie or a wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report p. 16.1 -see web link above). — instream: The combination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interact to provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. — Nearsifore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshor•e, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report - see web link on previous page). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of interconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. — Talus: Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0 5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 •• 2,0 m), composed of basalt, andesite, /nd/or sedimentary rock, including riprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhlbit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of > 2.0 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height. Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter atthe largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority Habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014, Update 15 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number WDFW Priority Habitats Priori habitats ]istett by W17FW (see complete descriptions of WDFW priority habitats, and the counties in which they can be found, in: Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 2008. Priority Habitat and Species List. Olympia, Washington, 177 pp. httR/Jwdf4v.,wa.g(2�l/Iniiilicallar_ts M-0.1 55/wdfw[ S id! or access the list from here: h[ W_ wdtw.wii.gov/(:cfnz.='on/ohs/list/) Count how many of the following priority habitats are within 330 ft (100 m) of the wetland unit: NOTE: This question is independentof the land use between the wetland unitand the priority habitat, Aspen Stands: Pure or mixed stands of aspen greater than 1 ac (0.4 ha), Biodiversity Areas and Corridors: Areas of habitat that are relatively important to various species of native fish and wildlife (full descriptions in WDFW PHS report). Herbaceous Balds: Variable size patches of grass and forbs on shallow soils over bedrock. Old-growth/Mature forests: Qld•growth west ofCAscade crest- Stands of at least 2 tree species, Forming a multi - layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha ) > 32 in (81 cm) dbh or> 200 years of age. Mature forests - Stands with average diameters exceeding 21 in (53 cm) dbh; crown cover may be less than 100%; decay, decadence, numbers of snags, and quantity of large downed material is generally less than that found in old -growth; 80-200 years old west of the Cascade crest. Oregon White Oak; Woodland stands of pure oak or oak/conifer associations where canopy coverage of the oak component is important (full descriptions in WDFW PPIS report p. 158 - see web link above). Riparian: The area adjacent to aquatic systems with flowing water that contains elements of both aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems which mutually influence each other. Westside Prairies: Herbaceous, nun -forested plant communities that can either take the form of a dry prairie Ora wet prairie (full descriptions in WDFW PH5 report p. 161 - see web link above), Insti-earn; Thecombination of physical, biological, and chemical processes and conditions that interactto provide functional life history requirements for instream fish and wildlife resources. Nearslore: Relatively undisturbed nearshore habitats. These include Coastal Nearshore, Open Coast Nearshore, and Puget Sound Nearshore. (full descriptions of habitats and the definition of relatively undisturbed are in WDFW report - see web link on previous pgge). Caves: A naturally occurring cavity, recess, void, or system of in[erconnected passages under the earth in soils, rock, ice, or other geological formations and is large enough to contain a human. — Cliffs: Greater than 25 ft (7.6 m) high and occurring below 5000 ft elevation. — Talus; Homogenous areas of rock rubble ranging in average size 0.5 - 6.5 ft (0.15 - 2.0 in), composed of basalt, andesite, �Snd/or sedimentary rock, includingriprap slides and mine tailings. May be associated with cliffs. —//. Snags and Logs: Trees are considered snags if they are dead or dying and exhibit sufficient decay characteristics to enable cavity excavation/use by wildlife. Priority snags have a diameter at breast height of:- 20 in (51 cm) in western Washington and are > 6.5 ft (2 m) in height Priority logs are > 12 in (30 cm) in diameter at the largest end, and > 20 ft (6 m) long. Note: All vegetated wetlands are by definition a priority habitat but are not included in this list because they are addressed elsewhere. Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 15 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number AAC CATEGORIZATION BASED ON SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS Wetland Type Category check Mot apoy to tiw weljond Orin the y. _iptproprewe rrilena are met. _af]"aflycrderir, SC 1.0. Estuarine wetlands Does the wetland meet the following criteria for Estuarine wetlands? — The dominant water regime is tidal, — Vegetated, and — With a salinity greate+ than 0.5 ppt Yes -Go to SC 1.1 (No Not an estuarine wetland SC 1.1. Is the wetland within a National Wildlife Refuge, National Park, National Estuary Reserve, Natural Area Preserve, State Park or Educational, Environmental, or Scientific Reserve designated Under C 332-30-151? Cat. Yes = Category 1 Go to SC 1.2 SC 1.2. Is the wetland unit at least 1 ac in size and meets at least two of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing, and has less than 10% cover of non-native plant species. (If non-native species are Spartina, see page 25) Cat. At least IN of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. Cat. II —The wetland has at least two of the following features: tidal channels, depressions with open water, or contiguous freshwater wetlands. Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 2.0. Wetlands of High Conservation Value (WHCV) SC 2.1. Has the WA Department of Natural Resources updated their website to include the list of Wetlands of High Conservation Value? Yes - Go to SC 2.2 Na Go to SC 2.3 Cat, SC 2.2. Is the wetland listed on the WDNR database as a Wetland of High Conservation Value? � Yes = Category I Nol Not a WHCV SC 2.3. Is the wetland in a Section/Township/Range that contains a Natural Heritage wetland? http:/�wwLdnr.wa.pov/+7h��ra#_[iesk� las�arch w++li �wetl;rnds.udf Yes - Contact WNHP/WDNR and go to SC 2.4 (9- Not a WHCV SC 2.4. Has WDNR identified the wetland within the S/T/R as a Wetland of High Conservation Valu and listed it on their website? Yes = Category I = Not a WHCV SC 3.0. Bogs Does the wetland (or any part of the unit) meet both the criteria for soils and vegetation in bogs? Use the key below. if you answer YES you wlUstill need to rate the wetland based on its functions. SC 3.1. Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soil horizons, either pests or mucks, that ompose 16 in or more of the first 32 in of the soil profile? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 No Go to SC 3.2 SC 3.2, Does an area within the wetland unit have organic soils, either peats or mucks, that are les an 16 in deep over bedrock, or an impermeable hardpan such as clay or volcanic ash, or that are floating o op of a lake or pond? Yes - Go to SC 3.3 kt!gA Is not a bog SC 3.3. Does an area with peats or mucks have more than 70% cover of mosses at ground level, AND at least a 30% cover of plant species listed in Table 4? Yes = Is a Category I bog No - Go to SC 3.4 NOTE: If you are uncertain about the extent of mosses in the understory, you may substitute that criterion by measuring the pH of the water that seeps into a hole dug at least 16 in deep. If the pH is less than 5.0 and the plant species in Table 4 are present, the wetland is a bog. Cat. I SC 3.4, Is an area with peats or mucks forested (> 30% cover) with Sitka spruce, subalpine fir, western red cedar, western hemlock, lodgepole pine, quaking aspen, Engelmann spruce, or western white pine, AND any of the species (or combination of species) listed in Table 4 provide more than 30% of the cover under the canopy? Yes = Is a Category I bog No = Is not a bog Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 16 Rating Form - Effective January 1, 2015 Wetland name or number 6 SC 4.0. Forested Wetlands Does the wetland have at least 1 contiguous acre of forest that meets one of these criteria for the WA Department of Fish and Wildlife's forests as priority habitats? If you answer YES you will still need to rate the wetland based on its functions. — Old -growth forests (west of Cascade crest): Stands of at least two tree species, forming a multi -layered canopy with occasional small openings; with at least 8 trees/ac (20 trees/ha) that are at least 200 years of age OR have a diameter at breast height (dbh) of 32 in (81 cm) or more. — Mature forests (west of the Cascade Crest): Stands where the largest trees are 80- 200 years old OR the species that make up the canopy have an average diameter (dbh) exceeding 21 in (53 cm). Yes = Category I f Na Not a forested wetland for this section Cat. I SC 5.0. Wetlands in Coastal Lagoons Does the wetland meet all of the following criteria of a wetland in a coastal lagoon? — The wetland lies in a depression adjacent to marine waters that is wholly or partially separated from marine waters by sandbanks, gravel banks, shingle, or, less frequently, rocks —The lagoon in which the wetland is located contains ponded water that is saline or brackish (> 0.5 ppt) during most of the year in at least a portion of the lagoon (needs o,be measured near the bottom) Yes — Go to SC 5.1 No —Not a wetland in a coastal lagoon Cat. SC 5.1. Does the wetland meet all of the following three conditions? —The wetland is relatively undisturbed (has no diking, ditching, filling, cultivation, grazing), and has less than 20% cover of aggressive, opportunistic plant species (see list of species on p. 100). Cat. II —At least'/ of the landward edge of the wetland has a 100 ft buffer of shrub, forest, or un-grazed or un- mowed grassland. —The wetland is larger than 1/io ac (4350 ft') Yes = Category I No = Category II SC 6.0. Interdunal Wetlands Is the wetland west of the 1889 line (also called the Western Boundary of Upland Ownership or WBUO)? If you answer yes you will still need to rate the wetland based on Its habitat functions. In practical terms that means the following geographic areas- - Long Beach Peninsula: Lands west of SR 103 — Grayland-Westport: Lands west of SR 1D5 Cat — Ocean Shores-Copalis: Lands west of SR 115 and SR 109 Yes — Go to SC 6.1 �No-not an interdunal wetland for rating SC 6.1. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger and scores an 8 or 9 for the habitat functions on the form (rates H,H,H or H,H,M Cat. II for the three aspects of function)? Yes = Category I No — Go to SC 6.2 SC 6.2. Is the wetland 1 ac or larger, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is 1 ac or larger? Yes = Category II No — Go to SC 6.3 Cat. III SC 6.3. Is the unit between 0.1 and 1 ac, or is it in a mosaic of wetlands that is between 0.1 and 1 ac? Yes = Category III No = Category IV Cat. IV Category of wetland based on Special Characteristics Ifyou answered No for all types, enter "Not Applicable" on Summary Form Wetland Rating System for Western WA: 2014 Update 17 Rating Form — Effective January 1, 2015 Figure 1 - Cowardin Plant Classes N 2012 USGS Aerial 1 inch equals 100 feet Feet 0 50 100 200 R.� •' _ t jtl . �' '4 � .t -- - r Legend Wetland -Boundary (Sketch) Site 76 , . KC Tax Parpels Plant Classes 7' Figure 2 Hydroperiods and Outlet Location N 2012 USGS Aerial 1 inch equals 100 feet Feet 0 50 100 200 l f .i r 1 • °� �r 1 r -:4 r: "r^ e AL i,•S w t If ' Legend Site .� Hydrology k '� } a Al Figure 4 - Wetland Sketch and Buffer, err k� l— f ro aas�UL V"lQlGl-l\,rCo (C CIT FederalWay DATE: TO: FROM: Leila Willoughby -Oakes MEMORANDUM Community Development Department SUBJECT: KENNY WETLAND REVIEW - (15-103923-00-AD) 922 SW 356TH ST From: Anderson, Paul S. (ECY) [mailto:paan461@ECY.WA.GOV] Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 10:01 AM To: Leila Willoughby -Oakes Subject: RE: Wetlands- Professional Survey Requirements Thanks Leila. I'm glad we could be of help on the Yoon project and it sounds like things are still heading the right direction. would agree with your opinion that an "approximation" isn't good enough for permitting. Ideally, the flagged bound ry would be fully surveyed but we have accepted boundaries that have been GPS'd as lufficiently accurate. If the only impacts are to the buffer, it would be the City's decision as to what is appropriate. If the site is small enough, it may be possible to measur off a few points during a site visit to confirm if the drawings are sufficiently accurate. Paul Paul S. Anderson, PWS Wetlands/401 Unit Supervisor Washington State Department of Ecology 3190 - 160th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008 Phone: (425) 649-7148 Cell: (425) 765-4691 Fax: (425) 649-7098 Email: Paul.S.Anderson -_ecv.wa.c�ov From: Leila Willoughby -Oakes [mailto: Leila.Willou b -Oakes cit offederalwa .cam] Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2016 9:21 AM To: Anderson, Paul S. (ECY) cpaan461 aECY.WA.GOV> Subject: Wetlands- Professional Survey Requirements Hi Paul, I hope this email finds you well. I have a question. Are there provisions in the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements (which we have adopted) that enable jurisdictions to require a Wetland Map that is professionally surveyed? A lot of my projects have reports often stating the wetland boundaries are an "approximation" (no good in my opinion), and lots of my project seem to be leaning in the reasonable use/buffer intrusion direction. It explicitly states that a psurvey is needed when working within a wetland but not during a buffer intrusion.... Have a great day! Leila L. Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Cr" or Federal Way 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 Phone:253/835-2644 Fax: 253/835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com Figure 3 - Contributing Basin N 2012 USGS Aerial 1 inch equals 300 feet A Feet 0 150 300 600 4 SO! e IN I A 1.4 Al a A .49 Legend .4 . If Contributing Basin To Weiland Site Wetland Sketch j m Figure 4 Habitat 2012 USGS Aerial 1 inch equals 1,000 feet I 0 500 1,000 ri Feet 2.000 L 1-1' • .fit- ■�4' � �.� 4. 4 �'1 itq .v� LZLZ Am i .10 Legetid A1djOpoMHabitat Accessible KM BLIffer .. UVetiand Sketch CITY OF Federal Way CITY HALL 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 (253) 835-7000 www. cityofiederalway.. com Jim Ferrell, Mayor July 6, 2018 Mr. Vitaliy Shablevskiy 35310 25d, Avenue SW Federal Way, WA 98023 taniashablevskiv@gm-,ii.corn FILE Re: File #18-102857-00-PC; PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE Shablevs1dy Reasonable Use/Buffer Encroachment, XXXX SW 354th Street Dear Mr. Shablevskiy: The Community Development Department is in receipt of your preapplicarion conference request. The application has been routed to members of the Development Revien, Committee and the meeting has been scheduled as follows: 9:00 a.m. — Thursday, July 26, 2018 Hylebos Conference Room Federal Way City Hall, 2nd Floor 33325 8th Avenue South Federal Way, WA 98003 We look forward to meeting with you. Please coordinate directly with anyone else you would like to attend the meeting as this will be the only notice sent by the department. If you have any questions regarding the meeting, please contact me at leil'a.willo a hby-esQcityoffedera1way.com, or 253-835-2644. Sincerel4&V It r 1 Leila Willoughby -Oakes Associate Planner Doc LD- 77992 18-102857-00-PC RECEIVED 40k CITY OF 10'::tt=P Federal Way APPLICATION NO(s) JUN 2 7 2018 MASTER LAND USE APPLICATION DEPARTMENT OF COMMuNrry DEVELOPMENT CITY OF FEDERAL WAY 33325 8s° Avenue South COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Federal Way, WA 98003-6325 253-835-2607;Fax 253-835-2609 www.citvoffederalAvay.com g — / ©2— 5 7 ` 019' i-r— Date MP - Project Name I'� �f<� f'S -enCe. Property Address/Location I �f h Parcel Number(s) 30 Z i b LJ r 10-79 3 0Z' 0 L/ 9 bb7 Y Project Description PLEASE PRINT Type of Permit Required Annexation Binding Site Plan Boundary Line Adjustment Comp Plan/Rezone Land Surface Modification Lot Line Elimination Preapplication Conference Process I (Director's Approval) Process II (Site Plan Review) Process III (Project Approval) Process IV (Hearing Examiner's Decision) Process V (Quasi -Judicial Rezone) Process VI SEPA w/Project SERA Only Shoreline: Variance/Conditional Use Short Subdivision Subdivision Variance: Commercial/Residential Required Information -7, A Zoning Designation Comprehensive Plan Designation Value of Existing Improvements Value of Proposed Improvements International Building Code (IBC): Occupancy Type Construction Type Applic�t�I�( v�c�i� � Name: Tr �• Address: �j3+D Z Ave Sm City/State: P{p;u( ' Zip: Phone: 2,53 9 (elf Fax: Email: �Zwl l�5>r�-blifil it j[ q�Vl�� . corn Signature: J J Agent (if different than Applicant) Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: Owner Name: Address: City/State: Zip: Phone: Fax: Email: Signature: 23 Bulletin #003 — January 1, 2011 Page 1 of 1 k:\Handouts\Master Land Use Application CITY OF FEDERAL WAY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE TRANSMITTAL DATE: July 6, 2018 (received June 27tn) TO: Cole Elliott, Development Services Manager Scott Sproul, Building Official Rick Perez, City Traffic Engineer Brian Asbury, Lakehaven Water & Sewer District Chris Cahan, South King Fire & Rescue FROM: Leila Willoughby -Oakes, Planning FOR DRC MTG. ON: July 19, 2018- Internal July 26, 2018- 9:00 a.m. with applicant FILE NUMBER(S): 18-102857-00-PC RELATED FILE NOS.: 15-103923-00-AD (Wetland Delineation Peer Review) PROJECT NAME: SHABLEVSKIY REASONABLE USE REQUEST PROJECT ADDRESS: XXXX SW 354th Street; Parcel#: 302104-9007 ZONING DISTRICT: RS 7.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Pre -application conference request to determine requirements to construct a 2,800 square foot home, with 1,500-1,600 building footprint and associated site improvement. Category II Wetland. SW 354th St. is an unopened right-of-way. Mitigation plan required. LAND USE PERMITS: Process III -Reasonable Use of Subject Property PROJECT CONTACT: Vitakily Shablevskiy Email: taniashablevskiy@gmail.com MATERIALS SUBMITTED: MLU Building Footprint Plan Narrative Critical Area Mapping Pe vq- Or Awe I I mow. I'M AM OF ow J4 *06-` OW, m I